[Carl Russell]

Welcome Michael, Great to find out about your interests. You will find great stuff here. Try “searching” for “Logging Business” in the search box at the top of the page, you will find quite a few threads with good discussion about your inquiry.

Of course, if you get specific questions, I’m sure you will get good replies. Also touch base with some of the other members from Maine, and with folks from MOFGA LIF to get excellent assistance.

Good luck, Carl

[Carl Russell]

@Scott G 39969 wrote:

So in absence of any additional forthcoming comments from other members, where do we take it from here? Administrator or …?
-S

Yes any of the administrators can move those posts into the sustainable forestry category, and deactivate the DAPFI forum.

Carl

[Carl Russell]

Truthfully this is a perfect example of non-commercial work. A tree such as this hardly has enough value to cover cutting, delimbing, skidding, blocking, and splitting, IF everything goes perfectly. Any hazard, while certainly an interesting engineering challenge, will add enough effort/cost to the enterprise that I would be inclined to just destroy the thing and move on.

The greatest value in cutting this stem is in the reduction of competition in the residual stand, and if mulched down, can also contribute organic matter and recycled nutrients. I often cut trees like this, even without the vine challenge, down and leave them, just to make room for my felling pattern of larger more valuable trees.

I would save my engineering for trees 12″dbh and larger, and even then if they are just firewood, I’m apt to cut and run. Sawtimber however has value that generally will cover the added cost of recovery. Sawtimber also has enough value to cover the non-commercial work that is involved in reducing low grade.

If we want to stay safe, and remain cost effective, I don’t think we want to be wasting our time on situations like this.

Carl

[Carl Russell]

@Tim Harrigan 39916 wrote:

……That is a case where it would be nice to have a monkey that knows how to work a hatchet. Give him a hard hat and tool belt and stand back.

Now we’re thinkin’…..

Sometimes these vines can be much stringer than they look. Generally the small trees don’t have enough weight, and it can be virtually impossible to pull them down. Pulling them down can be very dangerous, because the hinge point is so high in the air. If the vine doesn’t let go the tree can lift the evener, or even cart way up off the ground in a hurry….

If I didn’t have a team with me, I would probably cut it down in blocks……. until the remainder hung in the air……. then I would probably keep dropping trees on it until I knocked it down….. or made a bigger mess. Sometimes you’re just working by the seat of your pants out there….

Carl

[Carl Russell]

@Does’ Leap 39646 wrote:

Hi Carl:

Great article. Thanks for the link. Can you break down how you came up with a cost of $175 – $225/mbf?

George

George, I started answering this, then got distracted with puppies, birthday parties, snow storms, and a Select Board campaign…

I have found that it is easier to use a $/Mbf pricing structure, simply because everything in the forest industry is paid for on that structure. I also like to adhere to it because there is a productivity incentive there as well, so that LO’s see that I am willing to put my skills on the line….. to some degree. Most people, even if they value my work, are skeptical about just paying me by the hour, as it opens the concept that I might not be earning my money.

Even so, I still work backward to my final harvesting rate. I have fixed and variable costs associated with my logging work. Obviously some of these are covered by what they provide for me on my own land, but from a business management standpoint, I need to consider them in the context of how I use them on a commercial job. Simply put, I need to bring home $250-$300 minimum on a daily basis when I have truck, trailer, horses(shoe, harness, vet, feed), logging equipment, and chainsaw. That averages to $35-$50/hour.

These are wide ranges really, and they are averages that I have worked out over many different instances. I have logged for $50/hour. I started out logging at $90/Mbf (1986). I have logged at $300/ Mbf. If you look at all of the firewood I have sold log length for $50/cd (or less) I have worked for even less.

Given the size of the timber, the length of skid, utilization factor (tree quality and form),and the specifics of the forestry, (ie lots of non-commercial chainsaw work), I decide on what I can reasonably accomplish in a full day in Mbf. If I can get 2Mbf/ day across the board, that is some good logging, and I could reasonably charge toward the lower end of my scale, maybe $175/Mbf. If the trees are small, need butting because of red rot, and the skid is 1500 feet, I may only get 1Mbf/day across the board, so I need to get up close to the top of my scale, $250/Mbf.

There are several factors at play, the degree of workmanship I bring to the logging, the quality of the trees and their market value, and the inherent costs of the chance, access, or terrain. As a timberland owner, I realize that the value of my lumber is based on the difference between what I get paid by the mill, and the cost of getting it there. Because I know that the work I am doing on my own land will have lasting effects, I realize that some of the cost of getting the logs out can be attributed to the investment that I am making in the future of my forestland. TSI, crop tree release, access road construction, are all costs that accrue during a harvest, but they have long-term payback.

When I work for other people, I bring the same philosophy. If their woodlot has high quality timber and good access, then they should get a value that reflects those investments. If those investments have not been made, I cannot be stuck carrying the weight of that financial gap. In other words, working on a $/Mbf rate, I provide LO’s with a fluctuating stumpage rate based on the grade of the material they have been growing, and the costs associated with the harvest…… And they have not hired me to reduce the cost of harvest, the services I offer are forest improvement, and surgical harvest based on ecological principles. I also believe that this provides incentive for them to consider investment-style forestry, as down the road the returns will get higher as a result of growing higher quality timber and reduced harvesting costs.

It may be an interesting exercise for you to think about breaking down your income from logs into stumpage and logging. You can start by getting a sense of what other loggers in your area are paying, then deduct that and trucking from the mill price. This way you can get a ball-park figure of the income you are making from logging. Then think about the decision-making process you put behind your operation. Think about the maintenance costs you incur, the work that you do in conjunction with the harvest, and the other “investments” you make on your own behalf.

These are real values. I have experienced that most landowners given the chance to discuss these things realize that these are important values to them as well. Basing my business model on being able to provide these benefits with proficiency, and the inherent capabilities of animal power, allows me the framework to explore these objectives with LO’s.

This is the reverse side of the regional stumpage value concept that drives modern forestry. Every pine tree is worth”X”, every ash, “Y”, ……. This means that every woodlot is viewed in terms of how to reduce the cost of harvest in order to attain these values. No doubt there are standards to protect against the worst-case scenario, but that means that woodlots with the highest value wood, and the best access, inevitably end up subsidizing the lots with lower value material, and costlier access. Even within woodlots improvement work that would add cost is generally avoided, and many ecological principles are compromised.

Carl

[Carl Russell]

I agree Scott.

I also think that those of us working to build cohesion between draft animal powered forestry operations will continue. Eventually we may have a stand alone structure, though not exclusive of DAPNet, just more specific to the needs of that association (small “a”).

We do not need to take up formal space on this forum. Especially since I think much of that discussion was in a private forum, and it would be good to enliven those threads by moving them to open categories.

Carl

[Carl Russell]

@near horse 39770 wrote:

….On a side note – if God made farmers, next time he needs to use some heavier gauge materials as this one is starting to wear out : )

Like a Dodge truck???:p Cheap modern manufacturers…

Carl

[Carl Russell]

@Kevin Cunningham 39747 wrote:

…..We have to devise clever ways to have these simple transactions and make money work for our community. Because while I would like everybody to have a deep sense of our interconnected sustaining biological, ecological, and social community, the taxes still need to get paid.

I wasn’t saying that we limit ourselves to non-paying community support. I think the key comes down to defining our practices as being different from the corporate food system, and activating folks to take the stand of seeing their food, and natural resource, money going into those operations that contribute in real ways to the substance of our communities by adding quality to the connection to the land.

Not as easy as it sounds, I know, but it can happen one family at a time, if we continue to focus. Of course, I think we lose ground when faced by ads like this one…… well maybe not lose ground, but this cultural phenomenon of advertising messages and market share is pretty complex for sure…

Carl

[Carl Russell]

@J-L 39728 wrote:

…….How can this change?

Kevin Cunningham wrote:

My opinion is that in order for the current trend of agriculture to change we need people who are wiling to support small-medium sized local farms and farmers financially.

I tend to think deeper than this…..

I recognize that finances pose serious considerations, but I feel that it really comes down to people placing value on community. We have been convinced that financial security, like affordable food, or farm profitability, are more important than a secure and nurturing relationship with the land that sustains us. Food is fundamental to human community, and the relationship to food through land is provided by the stewards of that land-base.

If people don’t learn to value the well-being that comes to them and their communities through a wholesome connection to the source of their food, then we will never be successful in any future endeavors. Hopefully that will be reflected in financial terms, by making sure that their food dollars go to the food producers who actually support their communities.

Another sad part about the use of that speech, is that it seems destiny would dictate that only a few of us will make the kind of commitment that farmers have traditionally made. “If I buy a Dodge truck, then it’s okay for me to buy GMO food from a multi-national corporation because I have tipped my hat to those hardy souls out there doing the work that I don’t have the balls to commit to”…..

Anyway, I did find a F350, diesel, standard, full-bed, regular cab, that wasn’t a dually…… A farm truck…..

Carl

[Carl Russell]

I am not a religious man, yet I was moved by that speech. I would have been, even had I not been watching the inspiring photos. I could hear the depth of his belief in the farming he describes. I remember farmers like that. I strive to be that type of farmer.

That being said, I was saddened that it was used out of context. We must remember that Paul Harvey was talking about family farms that existed during his life. I was also saddened that it was used shamelessly to inspire folks to buy a Dodge truck….. Just like taking advantage of the sacrifice of our Veterans and Oprah Winfrey’s heartfelt words to sell Jeeps. This frickin’ country we live in.

It makes me think of that quote… “Where are we going, and why are we in this handbasket?”:confused:

Furthermore, I know Dodge makes a good truck, or at least they used to, but when I went truck shopping a few years ago, I could not find a ton diesel, standard, full bed, without an extended cab, anywhere in the NE. What I did find I did not consider “Farm trucks”.

Anyway, thanks Kevin. I am so glad I don’t watch network TV anymore……. 😡

Carl

[Carl Russell]

I did some googling this morning and I found some interesting things….

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forest_ecology#cite_note-2

……Community diversity and complexity Since trees can grow larger than other plant life-forms, there is the potential for a wide variety of forest structures (or physiognomies). The infinite number of possible spatial arrangements of trees of varying size and species makes for a highly intricate and diverse micro-environment in which environmental variables such as solar radiation, temperature, relative humidity, and wind speed can vary considerably over large and small distances. In addition, an important proportion of a forest ecosystem’s biomass is often underground, where soil structure, water quality and quantity, and levels of various soil nutrients can vary greatly.^[2] Thus, forests are often highly heterogeneous environments compared to other terrestrial plant communities. This heterogeneity in turn can enable great biodiversity of species of both plants and animals. It also affects the design of forest inventory sampling strategies, the results of which are sometimes used in ecological studies. A number of factors within the forest affect biodiversity; primary factors enhancing wildlife abundance and biodiversity are the presence of diverse tree species within the forest and the absence of even aged timber management.^[3] …….

I looked up this reference Philip Joseph Burton. 2003. Towards sustainable management of the boreal forest 1039 pages and found it on Googlebooks…http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=r9rgVWO1MUkC&oi=fnd&pg=PR5&dq=Philip+Joseph+Burton.+2003.+Towards+sustainable+management+of+the+boreal+forest+1039+pages&ots=eEoNQEWUBf&sig=NKJ5IlnZzDLwnweyul5N2f6if6U#v=onepage&q&f=false It is a compilation of many interesting studies that shoot arrows all around the concepts we have been discussing here….

Carl

[Carl Russell]

I had a great meeting with the folks at the Rubenstein School of Environment and Natural Resources at UVM. They ahve some research ongoing that may speak to some of what we have been discussing. We also talked about ways that I may be able to get involved in studies at the Jericho research forest.

Also it occurred to me that I may not have shared this article in relation to this thread…..

http://northernwoodlands.org/articles/article/draft_animals_can_play_a_vital_role_in_forestry

Carl

[Carl Russell]

@highway 39595 wrote:

This is a copy of an e-mail sent to DAPNet from John Marunowski of the US Forest Service.

I would like to express my sincere appreciation to all those who helped with the Black Brook debris removal project in the Pemi Wilderness. For me it was an unforgettable experience to see draft horses in action, work with amazing partners, volunteers and employees and bring partial closure to a multi-year bridge removal project. The new partnership with the Draft Animal Power Network (DAPNet) was a huge success and I couldn’t have asked for a more dedicated, down to earth bunch of folks. My hope is that we will see their faces around the forest working on future projects.

The project was projected to last 3 days but we pulled it off in two long days (we were motivated with the prediction of freezing rain). In summary, sixteen Steel I Beams weighing approximately 900 lbs. each were pulled 1.8 miles to the Pemigewasset Wilderness boundary along with an assortment of wooden components from the bridge.

Thanks again for enduring cold weather and long days out there. We couldn’t have done it without your support. Ed, can you please pass this message along to all the DAPNet folks involved with and supporting the project.

Yesterday I was visiting University of Vermont School of Natural Resources and stopped in to see an old classmate of mine who works for USFS overseeing Wilderness in the Northeast…… and he said he had just got off the phone with his colleague in NH who was raving about your work.

Good job all….

Carl

[Carl Russell]

@Taylor Margison 39616 wrote:

…… I have quite a few years under my belt training riding horses, …….

I have a standard practice when buying horses….. you know, a quick way to see what I’m dealing with. Folks will tell you all kinds of things about what a horse has done, or can do, or whatever, and they’ll say “throw a harness on’em and you’ll see”.

Well, I decided years ago that I’d cut through all that crap, and tell the seller I’d like to see what they can do with the horse (that is supposedly so good), because I have no question I can get what I want from the animal, I just want to see what they’ve been through.

Most times, especially with the bluff and bluster ones, they decline…..

I bought a horse from a 14 year old girl once, and when I asked, “Can you show me what you can do with her?”, she said “SURE”!! and show me she did….. and that horse is still one of the best horses I’ve ever had….. although she don’t look so good now…… because she’s blind :p.

Welcome Tay, Carl

[Carl Russell]

Tom, you may be on to something there.

I realized the other day that I meant to say that you should be able to test how well he sees by bringing your hand toward his eye. You will not be able to poke a seeing horse in the eye. Also you can wave your hand at him to see if he flinches. For context try it on your oxen first.

Carl

[Author]

Posts